Nielsen's thesis is that the passive voice -- which is usually frowned upon by people who love good prose -- enables headline writers to "front-load" their heds with the key concepts from the story, making it easier for people scanning those headlines (as search results or feed headlines) to pick out their meaning more quickly.

However, recent findings from our eyetracking research emphasized the overwhelming importance of getting the first 2 words right, since that's often all users see when they scan Web pages. Given this, we have to bend the writing guidelines a bit, especially for elements that users fixate on when they scan – that is, headlines, subheads, summaries, captions, hypertext links, and bulleted lists.

Words are usually the main moneymakers on a website. Selecting the first 2 words for your page titles is probably the highest-impact ROI-boosting design decision you make in a Web project. Front-loading important keywords trumps most other design considerations.

Writing the first 2 words of summaries runs a close second. Here, too, you might want to succumb to passive voice if it lets you pull key terms into the lead.

This gadget does exactly as promised: it looks like a thumbdrive (sort of) and fries the circuitry of any computer it’s plugged into. It’s made from camera flash parts, is charged with a standard AA battery, and delivers a 300V zap of DC destruction to the port for all your USB-murdering needs. Note that this […]

The Cobham catalog, exposed by The Intercept, features countless pages of surveillance gadgets sold to U.S. police to spy on American citizens: tiny black boxes with a big interest in you. In the creepily bland feature lists and nerdy product names is a whisper of a dark future; perhaps darker than anyone can imagine.

This image depicts the most commonly-found stylesheet colors on the web’s top sites—Paul Hebert did an amazing amount of analysis and this is just one of the intriguing visualizations he came up with. Most of these are obvious staples, especially HTML red and blue, though it’s interesting how far the blue “cluster” is from the […]

The Black Friday Mac Bundle 2.0 is one of the Boing Boing Store’s best-selling Mac bundles yet, and it’s about to come to an end. If you don’t get your copy now, here’s what you’ll be missing:This bundle comes packing 9 top-rated Mac apps in one package, at the hugely discounted price of just $23.99. […]

The Boing Boing Store’s Gift Guide is full of ideas for pretty much anyone in your life like hipster ice cub trays, Xbox controllers, Halo Boards, and even diamond necklaces. As always, all products in the Boing Boing Store come at great discounts, too. Shop by price bucket starting at under $20. Under $20:Bloxx Jumbo Ice Trays […]

Unlike traditional lighters, the SaberLight features an electronic plasma beam that’s both rechargeable and butane-free. This sleek lighter is even approved by TSA, so you’ll never be stuck buying lighters you’ll just have to throw away partially used. For some people, like me, this is a pretty big game-changer. The SaberLight’s beam is actually both hotter and cleaner […]

17

There was a good example of the importance of getting the first several words right a few years ago.

Josh Marshall’s Talking Points Memo was using RSS feed software that took the first three words of the article to produce the headline.

One day Josh began an article with “Atrios is dead right about something-or-other”. Everyone who read his site via RSS saw “Atrios is dead”, and nothing else (Atrios, alias Duncan Black, is one of the leading progressive bloggers). This launched a wave of alarm because inevitably a few people didn’t click through, but posted “Josh Marshall says Atrios is dead” to their own blogs.

The passive voice is great, and I would speculate that even those who “love good prose” are also in favor of the passive voice. It’s certainly the case that philosophical writing more or less requires the use of passive voice – so much so that I find standard word processor grammar checks useless.

The rule ‘don’t use passive voice’ is much like the rule ‘don’t start a sentence with a conjunction.’ Both are crutches, sometimes useful in teaching people to write when you’re not yet ready to explain when it is and is not appropriate to use the (provisionally) forbidden form. But neither should continue to be held to in the writing of a mature author.

Avoiding passive voice creates a tone of certainty in prose. As a literature student, I never wrote criticisms that contained passive voice – it reduces the precision of one’s language, fosters misinterpretation and ambiguity and as a result opens the door for counterarguments. For emails and blog posts, though, it’s usually not worth the extra effort.

I don’t really agree with his main point, though. I think you could improve summaries/headlines (by his standards) by restructuring subjects within the sentence, and not necessarily resorting to passive voice.

The problem with passive-voice writing is that it leads to passive-voice thinking, which creates philosophical sloppiness. I can’t tell you how many times someone has said something to me like, “The poor in this country are exploited!” OK, by whom? The rich? The middle class? The government? The businesses? Or there was the person who said to me, “Women dressing like sluts have to be stopped.” By whom and how? By law? By force? By custom?

Using the passive voice in an in-depth discussion is too often a means of avoiding a commitment to an argument, and should be called out as such. In headlines it might be ok, but if the head reads, “Health Care Provided to Children,” the story darn well better say who is doing the providing.

But for certain purposes, what is important is that the children were given health care. If the question at hand is whether children are currently receiving adequate health care, it need not be important to know who is doing the providing. (Indeed, some means of measuring whether children receive health care may not be very revealing as to who provided it). Similarly, it may sometimes be easier to identify that a group has been exploited than to clearly identify a guilty party.

In such situations, it can be awkward or misleading to use the active voice.

It’s certainly the case that the use of passive voice is sometimes unclear or misleading. Being a good writer involves knowing when passive voice is and isn’t appropriate. For students at a certain level, a blanket prohibition on the passive voice may be easier than trying to teach them when it is appropriate.

But it’s silly to treat such a prohibition as a rule for mature writers, and it’s simply wrong for a word processor to identify it as a grammatical error.

It isn’t only passive voice that leads to sloppy arguments. I work with writers who are very unclear because they do not use specifics. The sentence isn’t passive, but vague. “The man says negative things.” This is not passive, but just as vague as any of your examples in passive voice. There is more that goes into the sloppy thinking you’re arguing against than simply people’s use of passive voice. Passive voice can be useful in lots of situations, and often it is not noticed. “The teacher told the student his sentence was in passive voice and should be changed to be correct.” It needs to be used carefully and consciously though, so teaching students when that voice works most effectively is important.

The most important rule for writers is “Know your audience.” Since the audience for web headlines includes search engines and people who are scanning for subject keywords, Nielsen has pointed out a perfectly good reason for a writer to choose to use a passive verb.

If the identity of the actor is unknown or unimportant, that’s another good reason. Less noble reasons may include a desire to mislead, or unfamiliarity with this basic grammatical concept.

The “rule” of avoiding passive voice is not a general rule of writing. It is a rule of writing news. When writing news, it is usually a good idea to avoid using the passive voice because its use often indicates that you have failed to include information that would be relevant. A sentence like “The mayor’s office fired five city workers today” is more informative than the sentence “Five city workers were fired today.” Writing in the passive voice often serves as a crutch for writers who don’t want to take the time to figure out who is doing what.

Part of what makes this story interesting is that the person is talking about writing news. However, in particular they’re arguing that passive voice is a good idea in headlines, even if its use should be discouraged elsewhere in the news article.

Of course. I don’t say passive voice is the only problem. What I do say is that it gives people the thought that there can be action without specific actors. This is fine if the actor is really of no relevance. My problem with it comes when people describe negative actions in the passive voice, seeking to avoid blaming or crediting someone.

To take my examples above, if there’s no specific entity exploiting the poor, then there’s no proper way to stop the exploitation. Passive voice can make people think that it’s therefore proper to relieve them of their exploitation, when they may deserve it. On the flip, if the health care is provided by at no cost, then either it’s generous donors or public funds. And people should know, so that we can salute the generous, or so the ones against using the public money to provide health care (me), can get mad.

Oh, I suppose I’ll catch some flack from the Nielsen-can-do-no-wrong groupies out there, but here goes. I used to work in the usability industry for one of NNG’s competitors. I never bought Neilsen’s arguments and considered his approach to be incredibly antiquated. Here is a review of Neilsen’s Designing Web Usability that I wrote for LibraryThing:

Jakob Nielsen is the computer industryâ€™s declared â€œking of usability.â€ To that I say The King Has No Clothes! If you are a text-centric person, you will really love the Spartan and bare-bones approach philosophized by Dr. Nielsen. However, if you consider yourself someone who is graphically oriented (probably the vast majority of todayâ€™s contemporary computer users), you will find this book a complete waste of time and a major disappointment. In a nutshell, Dr. Nielsen eschews anything graphical and advocates systems designs that are Luddite in nature. His design philosophy is antiquated and completely out of touch with todayâ€™s systems. Reading this book I am reminded of the classic Dilbert cartoon where Dilbert and Wally are having lunch with a bitter veteran software developer. â€œWhen I started programming,â€ quips the old school veteran, â€œwe didnâ€™t have any of these sissy icons and windows. All we had were zeros and ones â€“ and sometimes we didnâ€™t even have ones. I once wrote an entire database program using zeros.â€ I am also filled with the sense that perhaps Nielsen may have flunked Crayola 101 in kindergarten and has been on an anti-graphical rant ever since. If you loved the old days of command line DOS operating systems, blue screens and commands requiring acrobatic keyboard maneuvers (e.g., tap your feet and blink twice while simultaneously pressing CTRL-Left Shift-ALT-F7), by all means grab this book. If you enjoy graphical user interfaces, then youâ€™d better pass on this book.

Well, that said, he must be doing something right. NNG is going strong and my old consulting company folded.

Did you feel the shudder echoing through U.S. journalism schools? For those of us who treasure clear, concise writing, this isn’t welcome news. But a larger issue is whether we allow the technology to dictate communication strategy and erode its effectiveness.

But as Dennis points out, part of our audience is the search engine spider. And weaving this tangled web along with him is our SEO geek.

The headline is bunk; web headlines do not, as a rule, benefit from passive voice. The concept of passive voice is orthogonal to that of writing good headlines. It’s just that for specific headlines, passive voice might be the better choice (however not because it’s passive, but because more relevant words end up in the ‘skimming zone’ at the start), and that being useful some of the time is a step up from being useful pretty much never.

Similarly, just from considering that some acting roles call for an unusual appearance (think X Files), you wouldn’t conclude that “Actors benefit from rare medical conditions.”